4 Ryanair aircraft declare fuel emergency at same time
Thanks Captainplaystation.
It seems to me that the flight planners will normally have you there with an ok amount and that if the Captain decides on a bit more that they are not questioned about it , but do have to write the reason for it.
So the only problem will be with Captains who make poor decisions at the flight planning stages and First Officers who don't have the spine to say " actually I had a slightly higher figure in my head because of XYZ"
I am not saying that the crews of the four jets concerned made poor decisions, they all landed ok and sometimes things do get a fraction finer than you want due circumstance.
It seems to me that the flight planners will normally have you there with an ok amount and that if the Captain decides on a bit more that they are not questioned about it , but do have to write the reason for it.
So the only problem will be with Captains who make poor decisions at the flight planning stages and First Officers who don't have the spine to say " actually I had a slightly higher figure in my head because of XYZ"
I am not saying that the crews of the four jets concerned made poor decisions, they all landed ok and sometimes things do get a fraction finer than you want due circumstance.
ADMIRAL346:
Were you referring to my comment about fuel leagues? If so, perhaps I should explain that what we were interested in were the actual fuel BURNS for example from LGW to JFK and not in how little fuel was loaded or how much fuel we landed with.
Personally, I took an interest in seeing how efficiently I was operating the aircraft and I cannot see what is wrong with that.
Were you referring to my comment about fuel leagues? If so, perhaps I should explain that what we were interested in were the actual fuel BURNS for example from LGW to JFK and not in how little fuel was loaded or how much fuel we landed with.
Personally, I took an interest in seeing how efficiently I was operating the aircraft and I cannot see what is wrong with that.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We could (and no doubt will........) argue for days of the value of 'fuel league tables'. I flew with a Captain in DanAir who had a database of burns for each sector he flew and thought this was 'useful', but had no record of ZFW, wind or route flown.
FL tables are only as useful as the Al Gore rhythms used - in my time, BA's 'favoured' the managers (funny old thing) who flew more out and backs late am into a quietish base on return, and penalised the working class who got up at oh-***-awful in forrin parts and flew into a CatIII base on a regular basis. Pretty well meaningless.
FL tables are only as useful as the Al Gore rhythms used - in my time, BA's 'favoured' the managers (funny old thing) who flew more out and backs late am into a quietish base on return, and penalised the working class who got up at oh-***-awful in forrin parts and flew into a CatIII base on a regular basis. Pretty well meaningless.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why does more fuel equal more safety?
More fuel only means extended holding and a greater choice of in-flight planned destination alternates. It may increase your chances of landing at your planned destination, only because you can hold for longer than those on "minimum fuel". Where the 'extra' safety comes from is a mystery, all the time we have control over where we point the aircraft and up to the minute information about airfield weather, it is not compromised.
More fuel also increases your landing speeds, LDR, brake temperatures on arrival plus en-route fuel burn. Over the last ten years I've been flying on our minimum fuel policy and I've not had to divert nor arrived on minimum holding fuel. I've been within minutes of doing so...
Whether the company want you to divert or not is a different matter. They do this by the way the way they write their policies on carrying additional fuel. My company encourage me to fly with the barest minimum fuel, but only ask me to tick a box if I want more. But when faced with pure grot, I'll give then a call (their phone). They'll use their "skill and judgement" and say how much extra they want me to carry want OR and this is a big "or", they'll ask you to go and divert if you have to. And if during this call, I want more fuel, then I'll be given it. Even if that means we off-load passengers. Either way they'll pay me and look after the passengers whatever the outcome.
What is really important is that as soon as it appears you'll be landing with less than 30 minutes (of whatever your prescribed minimum) of fuel, you declare an emergency (aka "mayday"). If the RYR guys were in that position, then they did their jobs.
More fuel also increases your landing speeds, LDR, brake temperatures on arrival plus en-route fuel burn. Over the last ten years I've been flying on our minimum fuel policy and I've not had to divert nor arrived on minimum holding fuel. I've been within minutes of doing so...
Whether the company want you to divert or not is a different matter. They do this by the way the way they write their policies on carrying additional fuel. My company encourage me to fly with the barest minimum fuel, but only ask me to tick a box if I want more. But when faced with pure grot, I'll give then a call (their phone). They'll use their "skill and judgement" and say how much extra they want me to carry want OR and this is a big "or", they'll ask you to go and divert if you have to. And if during this call, I want more fuel, then I'll be given it. Even if that means we off-load passengers. Either way they'll pay me and look after the passengers whatever the outcome.
What is really important is that as soon as it appears you'll be landing with less than 30 minutes (of whatever your prescribed minimum) of fuel, you declare an emergency (aka "mayday"). If the RYR guys were in that position, then they did their jobs.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Dark side of the force
Age: 55
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
About 2-3 years ago there was an issue with a RYR flight in Barcelona BCN, they arrived with less than minimum fuel and requested to shoot APP and land whilst other aircrafts were on APP following the normal waiting pattern to land.
One IBERIA captain told them on frecuency that if they wanted to land first they should declare minimum fuel and there would be no problem for others to let them go down first.
The RYR diverted to Gerona GRO.
One IBERIA captain told them on frecuency that if they wanted to land first they should declare minimum fuel and there would be no problem for others to let them go down first.
The RYR diverted to Gerona GRO.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The idea of ringing someone else if I want more fuel doesn't sit well with me.
All clear now?
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Planet Earth for a short visit
Posts: 614
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just wondering......
If all four of these RYR aircraft had managed to land 'off airfield' within a short time frame, would the IAA have had to develop a spine and intercede?
Would it have at last, brought an end to this abomination of an airline and it's operation?
Well if not today, sometime soon then.
To all my friends there, keep your arse covered! Good luck.
Would it have at last, brought an end to this abomination of an airline and it's operation?
Well if not today, sometime soon then.
To all my friends there, keep your arse covered! Good luck.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reminds me of Britania crashing in Girona having diverted from Barcelona with minimum fuel,didn't kill anyone as there was no fuel to burn!Inexperienced skippers bullied by inexperienced base managers to make Michael even richer.I just love how aviation is getting so much safer.Don't blame the IAA he might be on holiday.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would hazard a guess that if you divert when at MIN RESV fuel you will often arrive with <30mins. On various diversions it has often taken 5 mins to get a clearance to start the diversion. If it's close by you then have to brief the arrival and approach at diversion quickly. If you've been in the hold at destination this should have already been done and some sort of FMC programming done for the route. You can create a 'route discontinuity' after DEST RWY and then insert the diversion route to IAF. When I did this technique to a budding 3000hr potential captain he remarked he'd never thought of that nor seen it done. (back to trained robotic SOP monkeys).
Anyway, you were not in the hold but divert almost on arrival as you are given an EAT and have little extra. It will be very easy to arrive at diversion with <30mins and then get a hold due to other diversions. In some circumstances diverting when at MIN RESV is too late, but that is a captain's decision and guidance on that is not often included in command courses. Shame.
Anyway, you were not in the hold but divert almost on arrival as you are given an EAT and have little extra. It will be very easy to arrive at diversion with <30mins and then get a hold due to other diversions. In some circumstances diverting when at MIN RESV is too late, but that is a captain's decision and guidance on that is not often included in command courses. Shame.
More fuel only means extended holding and a greater choice of in-flight planned destination alternates. It may increase your chances of landing at your planned destination, only because you can hold for longer than those on "minimum fuel". Where the 'extra' safety comes from is a mystery, all the time we have control over where we point the aircraft and up to the minute information about airfield weather, it is not compromised.
It matters not how much fuel you took if the delays are more than you can cope with. As long as you keep a eye on your options and don't allow yourself to commit to a "bad" one.
I fly to various corners of the world and often am happy with as little as five minutes contingency fuel. If something makes the destination unavailable, then I'll have to go somewhere else. Simples. A commercial risk, certainly, but not a safety issue.
What really matters is not how much fuel you can fit in the tanks but what you plan and do when it's running low. Many years ago as a junior FO, I used to look up to captains who took lots of extra fuel all the time (because they could). In retrospect, I see a lot of it was a lack of skill and/or judgement plus fear of the unknown. Quite a few characters went to pieces as soon as any sort of airborne fuel decision was required.
To reiterate: you can take as much gas as you like; what sorts the professionals out from the amateurs is keeping the operation safe when it runs low, for whatever reason. From what I read about the RYR diversions, they had some holding fuel but it wasn't sufficient, so they diverted and told ATC that they didn't want further delay (I don't think they got to the stage of PAN or MAYDAY). To me that satisfies the safety aspect.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: ***
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally, I took an interest in seeing how efficiently I was operating the aircraft and I cannot see what is wrong with that.
So if any promotions or other boni are attached to such a competition, I find it utmost dangerous for flight safety.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Wherever
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sad lack of airmanship is the only reason I can see for this. A prob 30/40 TS in Spain in July should have all the alarm bells ringing for all the good reasons (additional hazards) others have given in that environment.
At risk of blaspheming in this crazy accountant-run industry, AIRMANSHIP
At risk of blaspheming in this crazy accountant-run industry, AIRMANSHIP
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: El Dorado
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One has to wonder whether 30 minutes final reserve and 5% contingency fuel is enough in today's busy aviation environment.
Of course the accountants love these figures, but these are really a relic of a long gone era of when flying was for a privileged happy few and each nation had one modestly sized national "flag" carrier.
Of course the accountants love these figures, but these are really a relic of a long gone era of when flying was for a privileged happy few and each nation had one modestly sized national "flag" carrier.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More than enough - by the way, do not confuse 'contingency' with 'extra' fuel. It is a totally different calculation. I have NEVER found 5% to be too little. Read Full wings - as with 'personal endowment' - it is not always how 'much' you have got, but what you do with it.
Surely the basic issue is that it is only the aircraft Commander that has the absolute right (and duty) in law to decide how much fuel to depart with over and above what is legally required.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed, FireFly is correct in definition.
However, the number that will now call Ops for an adjustment to FOB when checking the weather, normally to save 2-3 mins of paperwork, leads me to believe they do not have the courage of their convictions in requesting said fuel, or more importantly, cannot be bothered to report, through proper channels, a trend to monitor requiring more fuel.
It is a thin line, we all put petrol in our cars, we all know it is expensive. It is to be carried in 'excess of PLOG' when the Commander sees fit, therefore the Commander can justify, please take the time to do so, sometimes, airport, runway changes etc Operational experience, he will be assisting others and justifying his/her position as 'Aircraft Manager'
Likewise, when presented with a computer generated round trip tanker PLOG, don't take another 5 tonne because it is cheap, it isn't anymore.
Above all, fly safe, your experience is valuable to your employer and those you mentor, F/O's, ground staff and the dreaded beancounters I hope.
However, the number that will now call Ops for an adjustment to FOB when checking the weather, normally to save 2-3 mins of paperwork, leads me to believe they do not have the courage of their convictions in requesting said fuel, or more importantly, cannot be bothered to report, through proper channels, a trend to monitor requiring more fuel.
It is a thin line, we all put petrol in our cars, we all know it is expensive. It is to be carried in 'excess of PLOG' when the Commander sees fit, therefore the Commander can justify, please take the time to do so, sometimes, airport, runway changes etc Operational experience, he will be assisting others and justifying his/her position as 'Aircraft Manager'
Likewise, when presented with a computer generated round trip tanker PLOG, don't take another 5 tonne because it is cheap, it isn't anymore.
Above all, fly safe, your experience is valuable to your employer and those you mentor, F/O's, ground staff and the dreaded beancounters I hope.